Skip to main content

About your Search

20120929
20120929
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
for a full accounting of the benghazi terrorist attacks and the events in yemen and egypt. the white house continues to give every appearance of stone walling, both the congress and the press. almost three weeks have passed since those attacks, and leaked from within the white house, an intelligence community suggests the obama administration has been involved in an outright cover up. there are reports tonight that officials within the administration were concerned from the very beginning about the message the white house chose to push after the attack. the attack that was spontaneous they said, and not at all the work of terrorists. here's white house spokesman jay carney back on the 14th of september. >> the incident in benghazi, as well as elsewhere, but these are all being investigated, what i'm saying is that we have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise, that there was a preplanned or alterior investigation behind the unrest. my point was that we don't have and did not have concrete evidence to suggest that this was not in reaction to the film. lou: he's referring to the almo
investigators still have not set foot in the ruins of the american consulate in benghazi, libya, tonight we're the first to tell you why. tonight, we have the likely reason and we have it from a top law enforcement official. four americans as you know were murdered in the assault, one american ambassador, christopher stevens. that was two and a half weeks ago. two and a half weeks that have seen the administration first describe this as a spontaneous outburst even though our reporting revealed that officials knew within 24 hours that it was not. only much later did they back away from that assessment. today, the director of national intelligence, james clapper, put out a statement explaining that early evidence supported that theory so that's why they told the white house and congress. clapper says that throughout the investigation, his agency made it clear that the assessment was preliminary and could change. neither his statement nor our sources specify a time frame for the dni's change of view. again, our sources tell us that law enforcement officials knew within 24 hours that this was a
in the ruins of the american consulate of benghazi, libya. tonight, we're the first it tell you why. the likely reason and from a top law enforcement official. four americans as you know were murdered in the assault, one american ambassador, christopher stevens, that was 2 1/2 weeks ago, 2 1/2 weeks, that saw the administration describe this first as a spontaneous outburst, even though reporting shows that officials knew within 24 hours it was not. today the director of national intelligence, james clapper, explained early evidence supported that theory, so that's why they told the white house and congress. clapper says throughout the investigation, his agency made it clear that the assessment was preliminary and could change. neither his statement nor our source have a time frame. law enforcement officials knew within 24 hours this was a terror attack. reporting reveals that even though the administration says the investigation is going smoothing, the fbi has hit a bump in the road. a senior law enforcement official, telling fran townsend, the fbi wanted the u.s. military to provide perimeter
to provide perimeter support in benghazi, protection, in other words, but that request was not granted. fran's a former white house homeland security advisor. she served in the george w. bush administration, currently she sits on the cia external advisory panel and recently visited libya with her employer, mcandrews and forbes. also joining us, former fbi assistant director, tom fuentes, who has extensive experience investigating attacks on americans overseas, and former cia officer, bob baer. so fran, so the fbi sought military protection to go into benghazi. why didn't they get it? >> well, the answer to that question, i think, is not really clear. so it's not unusual, when you want to set up a security perimeter, you may look to the host country. if the host country is unable or unwilling to provide it, we don't know what the answer to that is, y may ask if you think you need it for u.s. military support, but that's got to go through a process. it needs state department and nsc support, the u.s. military would have to make an assessment about how big a security package that would entail a
of two weeks now. that is what happened in benghazi? why was the message coming out of the administration so muddled at best and misleading at worse? when did they know that it was a terrorist attack? why won't the president actually use the term terrorist attack? well, yesterday there was a major break through and one agency came out and took responsibility. >> in fact, it was james clapper's office, the director of national intelligent basically trying to take the onus off the white house by saying hey it was the intelligence community's fault and said, this quote: in the immediate aftermath there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day in cairo. we provided that initial assessment to the executive branch officials and members of congress who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. through the our investigation we continued to emphasize that our information was preliminary and evolving. >> we were waiting for someone like james clapper or tom donilin to weigh
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)